Will you use Malhavoc's alternate classes in your campaign?

[Glyfair]

I'd rather not make my first poll during this current glut of polls, but this is a question where I'd really like to see the results. So, with my apologies:

Now that BOEMII is out, Monte (& Bruce Cordell) now has 4 separate variations on the standard D&D classes: the ranger (from his webpage), the psion (from "If Thoughts Could Kill), the bard (from BOEMII) and the sorcerer (also BOEMII). What I'd like to know is if you will use them, the originals, or both (maybe renaming one).

What do you think? Personally, I'm considering the Sorcerer and will almost certainly allow his bard under a different name (Skald perhaps). I've already decided to use Bruce's psion (although no one has really seemed interested in using psionics in my game).

Glyfair of Glamis

 

[SableWyvern]

Until I have MoTW, S&S, PsiHandbook and have replaced my T&B, S&F and DotF .pdfs (they were handed to me, I couldn't really say no) with the real thing, I won't even be looking at non WotC material. (ok, I occasionally look, but I'm not gonna buy).

I'd rather tweak classes with problems to suit my campaign than integrate an entire replacement class.

Edit: so far, the only change I've made is to give the Bard 6 skill points - an irrelevant change, since there aren't any in the campaign to this point. Based on what I've read I may need to make some balance changes to the Psionicist, but Psionics is going to fill a special role IMC anyway.

 

[Aaron L]

You dont' have an "I will use them All" option.

 

[Zarrock God of Evil]

It's multiple choice - he doesn't need I'll use them All.

I'll use all of them. I made a few tweaks to the Ranger (dropping high reflex, giving back d10 HD) but generally I think these classes are better than the PHB ones simply because more space and time were dedicated to each one. And in the hands of one of the 3E co-designers it's basically official to my mind (not that I Have any trouble with non-official d20 sources).

Bard: Fabulous new flavour - what the bard was supposed to be. The spellsong system adds so much extra flavour and makes the bard stand out on its own...

Ranger: Much more customisable and the Favoured Enemy system has been tweaked to perfection. The new feats rock as well...

Psion: It's pretty much the general consensus that this class was delivered broken and now the creator has fixed it! If that's not official then I don't what is....

Sorcerer: All the changes make perfect sense. A few more skills and d6 for hps reflect the sorcerer perfectly. The new spell list also really sets wizards and sorcerers apart. As it should be...

-Zarrock

 

[Glyfair]

Indeed. You have the option to select them all, so I didn't leave that as an option. However, some campaigns wouldn't use any, so I left an option for "none." For example, a Sovereign Stone campaign wouldn't use any of the core classes.

As an aside, I think the new bard class could be adapted to the Sovereign Stone magic system with much less work than adapting the original. I think the class would fit well in the world.

Glyfair of Glamis

 

[SableWyvern]

A victory for common sense, open-mindedness and mild intelligence in general!

OK.

This thread prompted me to actually look at the optional ranger class it mentions.

It now supplants the PHB Ranger IMC.

So, I must ask, is Monte's Sorcerer online somewhere? I'd like to check it out. (Edit - I have just discovered the answer to my question).

 

[DMaple]

Maybe when I start my next campaign I'll switch over but at the moment my players are happy with the Rangers and Sorcerers they have so I'm not going to swap mid-game as they are both 6th level now.

 

[Zarrock God of Evil]

Maybe when I start my next campaign I'll switch over but at the moment my players are happy with the Rangers and Sorcerers they have so I'm not going to swap mid-game as they are both 6th level now.

A good call probably. Luckily I'm about to embark on two new campaigns. One RttToEE and my new Dragonstar campaign...

-Zarrock

 

[ninthcouncil]

From the percentages it looks as though either a lot of voters didn't realise they could vote more than once, or a lot of GMs are using only one or two of these "marginal" classes anyway.

Personally, I'd say Monte's ranger wins hands down vs PHB. I only downloaded BoEM2 last night, so haven't made a proper asessment of the other two, but Monte appears to be in the lead here as well If his new Bard overcomes my strong prejudices against this class he's done a good job! (But, gentle players, if you take a lute down a dungeon in my campaign, it WILL get broken. Repeatedly.)

 

[Psion]

Ob: Monte's ranger is too good.

The bard: it seems well put together. However, I feel that the game in general and Song & Silence in particular have done too much to pidgeon-hole the bard into its celtic minstrel archetype. I personally would like to move bard to a more culturally adaptable class, with variants like skalds, tribal chanters, and so forth: any of a variety of roles in which performance and magic go together. Using Monte's class seems like it would go counter that effort. I am willing to give it a spin if a player expresses interest, but more likely I will tinker with my own add-ons, feats, and prestige classes to make the bard fit the more general role I am looking for.

The sorcerer: I am willing to give this one a spin if a player expresses interest, but do have some concerns about upping the HD of the class, which I think may make it too good compared to the wizard.

Bruce's Psion: Already use it, though I require your three disciplines match your three best scores when the character is created.

-Psion, the eternal tinkerer